| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jignesh K(dot) Shah" <J(dot)K(dot)Shah(at)Sun(dot)COM>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look? |
| Date: | 2007-07-27 09:15:13 |
| Message-ID: | 1185527713.4191.20.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 04:58 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
>
> > Top Wait time seems to come from the following code path for
> > ProcArrayLock:
> >
> > Lock Id Mode Count
> > ProcArrayLock Exclusive 21
> >
> > Lock Id Combined Time (ns)
> > ProcArrayLock 5255937500
> >
> > Lock Id Combined Time (ns)
> >
> >
> > postgres`LWLockAcquire+0x1f0
> > postgres`CommitTransaction+0x104
>
> Yeah, ProcArrayLock is pretty contended. I think it would be kinda neat
> if we could split it up in partitions. This lock is quite particular
> though.
Maybe, if we did we should set the partitions according to numbers of
users, so lower numbers of users are all in one partition.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-07-27 09:15:27 | Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-07-27 08:58:05 | Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look? |